我一直在阅读c++常见问题,对朋友声明很好奇。我个人从未使用过它,但我对探索这门语言很感兴趣。
使用friend的一个好例子是什么?
读了一些常见问题,我喜欢<< >>操作符重载和添加作为这些类的朋友的想法。然而,我不确定这如何不会破坏封装。什么时候这些异常可以保持在OOP的严格范围内?
我一直在阅读c++常见问题,对朋友声明很好奇。我个人从未使用过它,但我对探索这门语言很感兴趣。
使用friend的一个好例子是什么?
读了一些常见问题,我喜欢<< >>操作符重载和添加作为这些类的朋友的想法。然而,我不确定这如何不会破坏封装。什么时候这些异常可以保持在OOP的严格范围内?
当前回答
In C++ "friend" keyword is useful in Operator overloading and Making Bridge. 1.) Friend keyword in operator overloading :Example for operator overloading is: Let say we have a class "Point" that has two float variable"x"(for x-coordinate) and "y"(for y-coordinate). Now we have to overload "<<"(extraction operator) such that if we call "cout << pointobj" then it will print x and y coordinate (where pointobj is an object of class Point). To do this we have two option: 1.Overload "operator <<()" function in "ostream" class. 2.Overload "operator<<()" function in "Point" class. Now First option is not good because if we need to overload again this operator for some different class then we have to again make change in "ostream" class. That's why second is best option. Now compiler can call "operator <<()" function:
1.Using ostream object cout.As: cout.operator<<(Pointobj) (form ostream class).
2.Call without an object.As: operator<<(cout, Pointobj) (from Point class).
Beacause we have implemented overloading in Point class. So to call this function without an object we have to add"friend" keyword because we can call a friend function without an object. Now function declaration will be As: "friend ostream &operator<<(ostream &cout, Point &pointobj);" 2.) Friend keyword in making bridge : Suppose we have to make a function in which we have to access private member of two or more classes ( generally termed as "bridge" ) . How to do this: To access private member of a class it should be member of that class. Now to access private member of other class every class should declare that function as a friend function. For example : Suppose there are two class A and B. A function "funcBridge()" want to access private member of both classes. Then both class should declare "funcBridge()" as: friend return_type funcBridge(A &a_obj, B & b_obj);I think this would help to understand friend keyword.
其他回答
在做TDD的时候,我经常使用c++中的'friend'关键字。
朋友能知道我的一切吗?
更新:我从Bjarne Stroustrup网站上找到了这个关于“朋友”关键字的有价值的答案。
“好友”是一种授予访问权限的显式机制,就像会员资格一样。
这可能不是一个实际的用例情况,但可能有助于说明类间朋友关系的使用。
会所
class ClubHouse {
public:
friend class VIPMember; // VIP Members Have Full Access To Class
private:
unsigned nonMembers_;
unsigned paidMembers_;
unsigned vipMembers;
std::vector<Member> members_;
public:
ClubHouse() : nonMembers_(0), paidMembers_(0), vipMembers(0) {}
addMember( const Member& member ) { // ...code }
void updateMembership( unsigned memberID, Member::MembershipType type ) { // ...code }
Amenity getAmenity( unsigned memberID ) { // ...code }
protected:
void joinVIPEvent( unsigned memberID ) { // ...code }
}; // ClubHouse
会员班的
class Member {
public:
enum MemberShipType {
NON_MEMBER_PAID_EVENT, // Single Event Paid (At Door)
PAID_MEMBERSHIP, // Monthly - Yearly Subscription
VIP_MEMBERSHIP, // Highest Possible Membership
}; // MemberShipType
protected:
MemberShipType type_;
unsigned id_;
Amenity amenity_;
public:
Member( unsigned id, MemberShipType type ) : id_(id), type_(type) {}
virtual ~Member(){}
unsigned getId() const { return id_; }
MemberShipType getType() const { return type_; }
virtual void getAmenityFromClubHouse() = 0
};
class NonMember : public Member {
public:
explicit NonMember( unsigned id ) : Member( id, MemberShipType::NON_MEMBER_PAID_EVENT ) {}
void getAmenityFromClubHouse() override {
Amenity = ClubHouse::getAmenity( this->id_ );
}
};
class PaidMember : public Member {
public:
explicit PaidMember( unsigned id ) : Member( id, MemberShipType::PAID_MEMBERSHIP ) {}
void getAmenityFromClubHouse() override {
Amenity = ClubHouse::getAmenity( this->id_ );
}
};
class VIPMember : public Member {
public:
friend class ClubHouse;
public:
explicit VIPMember( unsigned id ) : Member( id, MemberShipType::VIP_MEMBERSHIP ) {}
void getAmenityFromClubHouse() override {
Amenity = ClubHouse::getAmenity( this->id_ );
}
void attendVIPEvent() {
ClubHouse::joinVIPEvent( this->id );
}
};
设施
class Amenity{};
如果你看看这些类之间的关系;会所拥有各种不同类型的会员资格和会员资格。成员都派生自超类或基类,因为它们都共享公共的ID和枚举类型,外部类可以通过基类中的访问函数访问它们的ID和类型。
然而,通过这种成员及其派生类的层次结构以及它们与ClubHouse类的关系,派生类中唯一具有“特殊特权”的是VIPMember类。基类和其他2个派生类不能访问ClubHouse的joinVIPEvent()方法,但VIP Member类拥有该特权,就好像它拥有对该事件的完全访问一样。
所以对于vip会员和ClubHouse,这是一个双向通道,而其他会员职业是有限的。
您使用私有/受保护/公共权限控制成员和函数的访问权限? 所以假设这3个层面中的每一个都很清楚,那么很明显我们遗漏了一些东西……
例如,将成员/函数声明为protected是非常通用的。你的意思是,这个功能对每个人来说都是遥不可及的(当然,继承的孩子除外)。但是异常呢?每个安全系统都让你有某种类型的“白名单”,对吗?
所以,“朋友”让你拥有坚如磐石的对象隔离的灵活性,但也允许为你认为合理的事情创造一个“漏洞”。
我想人们之所以说不需要它,是因为总有一种设计可以不需要它。我认为这类似于讨论全局变量:你永远不应该使用它们,总有办法不用它们……但在现实中,你会看到在某些情况下,这是(几乎)最优雅的方式……我认为朋友之间也是如此。
它实际上没有任何好处,除了让你在不使用设置函数的情况下访问成员变量
但这并不是正确的看法。 其理念是控制WHO可以访问什么,是否有设置功能与此关系不大。
friend关键字有很多好的用途。以下是我能立即看到的两种用法:
朋友的定义
友元定义允许在类作用域中定义函数,但该函数不会被定义为成员函数,而是被定义为外围命名空间的自由函数,并且除了依赖参数的查找之外通常不可见。这使得它对于操作符重载特别有用:
namespace utils {
class f {
private:
typedef int int_type;
int_type value;
public:
// let's assume it doesn't only need .value, but some
// internal stuff.
friend f operator+(f const& a, f const& b) {
// name resolution finds names in class-scope.
// int_type is visible here.
return f(a.value + b.value);
}
int getValue() const { return value; }
};
}
int main() {
utils::f a, b;
std::cout << (a + b).getValue(); // valid
}
私有CRTP基类
有时候,你会发现策略需要访问派生类:
// possible policy used for flexible-class.
template<typename Derived>
struct Policy {
void doSomething() {
// casting this to Derived* requires us to see that we are a
// base-class of Derived.
some_type const& t = static_cast<Derived*>(this)->getSomething();
}
};
// note, derived privately
template<template<typename> class SomePolicy>
struct FlexibleClass : private SomePolicy<FlexibleClass> {
// we derive privately, so the base-class wouldn't notice that,
// (even though it's the base itself!), so we need a friend declaration
// to make the base a friend of us.
friend class SomePolicy<FlexibleClass>;
void doStuff() {
// calls doSomething of the policy
this->doSomething();
}
// will return useful information
some_type getSomething();
};
在这个回答中,你会发现一个不做作的例子。在这个答案中使用了另一个代码。CRTP基类强制转换其this指针,以便能够使用数据成员指针访问派生类的数据字段。
您可以坚持最严格和最纯粹的OOP原则,并确保任何类的数据成员都没有访问器,这样所有对象都必须是唯一可以知道它们的数据的对象,并且对它们进行操作的唯一方法是通过间接消息(即方法)。
但即使是c#也有一个内部可见性关键字,Java也有默认的包级可访问性。c++实际上更接近于OOP的理想,它通过精确地指定哪些其他类或只有其他类可以看到一个类,从而最大限度地减少了类的可见性。
我不太使用c++,但如果c#有朋友,我会用它来代替我经常使用的汇编全局内部修饰符。它并没有真正打破封装,因为。net中的部署单元是一个程序集。
但是还有InternalsVisibleToAttribute(otherAssembly),它的作用类似于跨组装的友元机制。微软将此用于可视化设计器程序集。